Trump Admin Pauses All Student Visa Interviews, May Include Social Media Vetting

Of course, I disagree 100%

I don't think you do. He's not denying that the country was founded to do what you say. He's saying that it was converted into a nation by Lincoln to subvert it from that purpose.

In other words, he's sort of quibbling over the term you used, and he has a point.
 
Where can one read this?

The Constitution.

...and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The very first Act addressing who could become a citizen of the new Republic, limited naturalization to "free white persons".

1790-Act.jpg
 
I don't think you do. He's not denying that the country was founded to do what you say. He's saying that it was converted into a nation by Lincoln to subvert it from that purpose.

In other words, he's sort of quibbling over the term you used, and he has a point.

OK, fair enough, I'll let him follow up if he wants.

Let's just call it the Republic then.
 
The Constitution.

...and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The very first Act addressing who could become a citizen of the new Republic, limited naturalization to "free white persons".

1790-Act.jpg
Notice the text you highlighted, "United States." That's plural, not singular. It's multiple states, not one. And although the document does use the word "nation" in reference to foreign nations, it never once refers to the plurality of the states that are united as a nation.
 
OK, fair enough, I'll let him follow up if he wants.

Let's just call it the Republic then.
That's another word that the US Constitution does not apply to the plurality of states. It refers to each individual state having a republican form of government. But it never calls the union created by them a republic.
 
MY posterity
Also, notice how you replaced the framers "our posterity" with your own personal individual posterity, as if worrying about what becomes of your own personal posterity is everyone else's responsibility.

If you're butthurt because you didn't do a good enough job of passing on your values and biases to your kids and grandkids to prevent one of them from getting knocked up by a person of color, that's on you. When the rest of us who don't share your values and biases in the first place choose that our posterity will be the products of miscegenation, that's none of your business.

And furthermore, it hopefully doesn't need to be pointed out that the framers' "our posterity" is not limited to the genealogical descendants of the population of the states of that time.
 
And furthermore, it hopefully doesn't need to be pointed out that the framers' "our posterity" is not limited to the genealogical descendants of the population of the states of that time.

It also doesn't need to be pointed out that it was already common knowledge that John Smith had produced progeny with quite a lot of help from an Indian.
 
that's none of your business.

Yes, it is.

20 years ago, the libertarian ethos told me that it was nobody's business who slept with whom in the privacy of their own homes.

And I took it at face value and believed it.

Fast forward 20 years and queer men dressed as women are dry humping 5 year old children on the school library floor, minor children are getting sexually mutilated and sterilized with tax money paying the way and pedophilia is rapidly being normalized.

Yeah, it's my business how a society dissolves and how to keep it together.

Who is allowed into a society and if they are allowed to stay and why, is one of those things.

How long would the Amish survive as a distinct community if anybody who landed in Lancaster could suddenly proclaim they were Amish?
 
Last edited:
Buchanan is 100% wrong. The USA never should have been a nation. It was not intended by those who ratified the Constitution that it become a nation. Its status as a nation was something brought about through conquest by Lincoln. And its endurance as a nation (if it's even accurate now to call it one) is not a worthy goal.
The founders beg to differ:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We were supposed to be structured more loosely, be we were always a nation, and all the founders spoke of us as such.
 
The founders beg to differ:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We were supposed to be structured more loosely, be we were always a nation, and all the founders spoke of us as such.

Hey, moron, what you just quoted in no way backs your bullshit claim.
 
Notice the text you highlighted, "United States." That's plural, not singular. It's multiple states, not one. And although the document does use the word "nation" in reference to foreign nations, it never once refers to the plurality of the states that are united as a nation.
“...legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”
― Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson

“We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

The Ambassador [of Tripoli] answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.

{Letter from the commissioners, John Adams & Thomas Jefferson, to John Jay, 28 March 1786}”
― Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”
― Thomas Jefferson


When called upon to draft a message for George Washington's fourth annual message to Congress, Thomas Jefferson produced the following paragraphs:


The interests of a nation, when well understood, will be found to coincide with their moral duties. Among these it is an important one to cultivate habits of peace and friendship with our neighbors. To do this we should make provision for rendering the justice we must sometimes require from them. I recommend therefore to your consideration Whether the laws of the Union should not be extended to restrain our citizens from committing acts of violence within the territories of other nations, which would be punished were they committed within our own.—And in general the maintenance of a friendly intercourse with foreign nations will be presented to your attention by the expiration of the law for that purpose, which takes place, if not renewed, at the close of the present session.

In execution of the authority given by the legislature, measures have been taken for engaging some artists from abroad to aid in the establishment of our mint; others have been employed at home; provision has been made of the requisite buildings, and these are now putting into proper condition for the purposes of the establishment. There has been also a small beginning in the coinage of the half dismes and Cents, the want of small coins in circulation calling our first attentions to them. - Thomas Jefferson, draft written for George Washington's fourth annual message to Congress, October 15, 1792[1]

Jefferson later re-wrote the first paragraph of the message, prefacing his revision, "Instead of the paragraph 'The interests of a nation &c. – within our own,' formerly proposed, the following substitute is thought better."


All observations are unnecessary on the value of peace with other nations. It would be wise however, by timely provisions, to guard against those acts of our citizens, which might tend to disturb it, and to put ourselves in a condition to give that satisfaction to foreign nations, which we may sometimes have occasion to require from them. I particularly recommend to your consideration the means of preventing those aggressions by our citizens on the territory of other nations, and other infractions of the law of Nations, which furnishing just subject of complaint, might endanger our peace with them.—And in general the maintenance &c.[2]

Washington delivered the address with Jefferson's revised first paragraph and original second paragraph. Jefferson later expressed a similar sentiment in his own Second Inaugural Address:


We are firmly convinced, and we act on that conviction, that with nations, as with individuals, our interests soundly calculated, will ever be found inseparable from our moral duties; and history bears witness to the fact, that a just nation is taken on its word, when recourse is had to armaments and wars to bridle others.[3]





Jefferson, Arch-AntiFederalist that he was, made it quite clear we were a Nation.
There's much more out there from the Founders, but you know better anyway, you are just pretending otherwise.
 
Yes, it is.

20 years ago, the libertarian ethos told me that it was nobody's business who slept with whom in the privacy of their own homes.

And I took it at face value and believed it.

Fast forward 20 years and queer men dressed as women are dry humping 5 year old children on the school library floor, minor children are getting sexually mutilated and sterilized with tax money paying the way and pedophilia is rapidly being normalized.

Yeah, it's my business how a society dissolves and how to keep it together.

Who is allowed into a society and if they are allowed to stay and why, is one of those things.

How long would the Amish survive as a distinct community if anybody who landed in Lancaster could suddenly proclaim they were Amish?
What you miss is that quite a few libertarians are happy with how that turned out and with the idea of destroying this nation.
 
“We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the ground of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation.

The Ambassador [of Tripoli] answered us that it was founded on...

Not talking about the US, idiot.
 
What you miss is that quite a few libertarians are happy with how that turned out and with the idea of destroying this nation.

Why do you presume to speak for people you don't understand? Just enjoy being a jerk and embarrassing yourself?
 
I merely pass on what they themselves say repeatedly...

... and substitute your own bullshit. Because if you listened to people, instead of giving it a pass, it might allow you to see your own hypocrisy and trigger your cognitive dissonance.

We know, we know.
 
Back
Top